Talk:Alice Weidel

Far-right politician

We have a reference saying that Weidel belongs to a far-right party. I do not see any reason to require a reference that she is a far-right politician. If there are some doubts she is a politician, may be that should be removed as unsourced, but this woyuld be really silly.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:14, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I would leave out mention of her political position as it is controversial and unnecessary here. In reference to my controversial claim, please see the source below.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/23/german-anti-immigrant-afd-party-picks-leaders-election-drive/

'The less well known Ms Weidel is seen as a relative moderate within the AfD, and appears to have been nominated to placate party members alarmed by the choice of Mr Gauland'. The Telegraph. Published 23 April 2017. Retrieved 18 May 2017.

We should always be careful when placing controversial labels, especially on individuals, which may be seen as defamatory. I would like to see much more of a sourced, unanimous consciousness of her being far-right before we use this to describe her, especially in the opening paragraph. Also whether AfD is right-wing or far-right is controversial in of itself. Some sources claim it is a right-wing party, others far-right. Even if there was consensus for the party's political position (which as noted, there isn't) to then claim to know an individuals political position from within the party via this information is a WP:SYNTHESIS argument, and therefore should not stand. Helper201 (talk) 16:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

However, like it is now, saying just "politician" is also not really good. I would possibly agree with right-wing, though Merkel is right-wing as well, and there is, well, some difference between them.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Many politicians on Wikipedia do not have a labelled position on their page, which is good as placing a political position accurately on an individual isn't usually an easy or non-controversial task. If you want to be more specific, a better way would be to outline her political views on different topics. Please also make sure to place the relevant citation at the end of the sentence for each claim (not refer to somewhere else in the article). Helper201 (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I may do this at some point, but it will take a lot of time. A short-term solution would be just to collect sources which call her far-right and right-wing and cite all of them. Thank you also for teaching me how to edit Wikipedia. This is particularly useful to hear from a user with 3K edits.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I would say she is a right wing politician, and Merkel is a centre-right or centrist politician. The CDU campaign under the slogan 'die mitte' which means 'The Middle' PompeyTheGreat (talk) 07:29, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Section name: "Nazi slut" incident vs "Political correctness" incident

I recently changed the name of section "Nazi slut" incident to "Political correctness" incident. My edit was reverted with the explanation "But WP not censored. Need an argument to change this". My argument is that the purpose of the TV satire show host's comments were to show how extreme public discourse would be if "political correctness" were "put an end to", and that his actual comment is not relevant and also defamatory. Regardless of Weidel's political positions, giving undue weight to an offhand disparaging comment in this case I think violates WP:UNDUE, WP:IMPARTIAL, and WP:LIBEL. If we only consider WP:NOTCENSORED, a TV presenter could say for example, "Merkel is a Stalinist whore" and we would have to have that as a section name. Haben Sie einen guten Tag, Facts707 (talk) 10:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree. Not censored, but we have to be a bit sensitive, this is a WP:BLP. "Political correctness" incident is a preferable section heading. Or extra 3 incident or something that points to who she brought the suit against. – filelakeshoe (t / c)  14:56, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

I would call it "abuse controversy" or something like that. Political correctness is a bit tangential.Gaditano23 (talk) 17:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the comments. I changed it to <TV show "political correctness" incident>. I think the presenter from "extra 3" made his point, but I think anyone could have made the point and so it's not necessary to give "extra 3" more visibility from it by having the show name in the section title. Cheers, Facts707 (talk) 13:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

The English-language Reuters article cited has the title "AfD leader loses case versus German TV show that calls her 'Nazi bitch'". Someone had made this say "Nazi slut" instead of "Nazi bitch", which is incorrect. Sources have the titles they have, not the titles that Wikipedia editors think they ought to have.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:02, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Edit-warring

A brand new account, User:Newuser867 is edit-warring at the talk page removing information supported by reliable sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:45, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

joined the party in 2012?

the AfD was founded in 2013! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BountyFlamor (talk • contribs) 19:29, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Children

The article claims that "They have two children". The wording seems unnecessarily confusing/ambiguous. As far as I understand, it isn't possible in Switzerland where those children live (and not in Germany either for that sake) for two women who live together to be legally recognised as parents for a child. So those children clearly have a father somewhere. Weidel has explicitly confirmed in an interview that Bossard is the mother of the children, and that the children live with their mother in Switzerland, so the situation is clearly that she has a girlfriend who has two children, and that both the girlfriend and the girlfriend's children live in Switzerland, while Weidel herself primarily lives in Germany. It's fine to mention that, but it should be mentioned in a non-confusing way. --Jenimineto (talk) 09:27, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Ruckus at de-wiki

Moved to Talk:Alternative for Germany § Ruckus at de-wiki

Mathglot (talk) 10:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

"Right-wing AfD"

AfD, which is stated as far-right in its own article, is stated as right-wing here. I have done an edit to change that, but its reverted because the page is about Alice Weidel and not AfD, while the AfD is stated as right-wing in this very article. Because the original article refers to party as far-right, I redo my edit with the same references being given in the original article. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 14:36, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not particularly care whether AfD is described in this article as righ-wing or far-right, but so many references to the same point (and the references, as far as I see, do not even mention Weidel), are clearly inappropriate.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:20, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Ymblanter the aforementioned part of the article doesn't do any claims regarding Weidel but regarding AfD, which is originally stated as far-right in its own article. The line currently goes on like this:

" Alice Elisabeth Weidel (born 6 February 1979) is a German politician and has been the Leader of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) "

As you can see, it specifically says "right-wing" to AfD (which is, again, stated as far-right in its original page), not to Weidel. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 15:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

My point is that in the lede one has preferably zero links to this point, possibly one or two links if this is the point of contention (which so far does not seem to be the case). Not five and not ten.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Donation Scandal

Hey there is missing the lin to the donation scandal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany_donation_scandal Regards! --Fan-von-mir (talk) 22:36, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Covid

Weidel contracts Covid: https://www.dw.com/en/german-far-right-afd-co-leader-alice-weidel-contracts-covid/a-59795883 --Fan-vom-Wiki (talk) 17:41, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

mittel deutschland

i know the nazis like to refer to mittel deutschland in a "n-s" ( semi pun intended) matter but linguistically mitteldeutsch(land) is a west-east layer(burger patty) between north and south germany( roughly ranging from saarland - hessen - thuringen - sachsen(-anhalt) 2A00:6020:B385:3701:E04B:1F73:C6B2:1B1D (talk) 18:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Usually today "Mitteldeutschland" refers to the Eastern Bundesländer between the North and the South: Saxony, Thuringia and Saxony-Anhalt. There's even a state tv channel related to this, so the term definitely also exists without a far-right context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitteldeutscher_Rundfunk

2003:E2:CF31:9A7A:B840:1A6A:776F:E5F9 (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Redirects to Adolf Hitler?

Hi all,

Any ideas why this page redirects to Adolf Hitler?? (Alice Weidel) pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Edit war

It appears that this page is in a state of edit war, some vandals are redirecting this page to “adolf hitler’s” page Kelcoz (talk) 07:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Whereas the last instance of vandalism was a few hours back, it was so intense in the morning that the article might benefit of a three-day semi-protection. I have applied the protection. Ymblanter (talk) 18:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

How is being called a "nazi slut" one of the controversies?

Please explain why this isn't on that guy's page and it is on hers. 213.233.85.221 (talk) 12:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Controversies (or incidents as in the article) as a general rule involve more than one person. You can add information about it to the Christian Ehring article yourself. Hope this helps. Gremlin of the wiki (talk) 06:01, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Yeah I find this really weird. That to me seems like gross sexist language. It should be on the other persons page, not here.2.103.234.181 (talk) 01:56, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

She went to court and lost the case. And it was a pretty high-profile case. Ymblanter (talk) 11:58, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Asylum and integration policy

Hi, I noticed that “cancellor” should be changed to “chancellor” in the 2nd line of the asylum and integration policy subsection under political positions. Thank you! 73.4.247.67 (talk) ) 16:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Done --FMSky (talk) 16:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Weidel as a moderate conservative part of Alternative Mitte

Perhaps we should reconsider including the description of Weidel as a 'moderate conservative' within the AfD in the article. Her claims, such as the assertion that Hitler was part of the left wing, represent a clear attempt at historical revisionism, as noted by historians like Ilko-Sascha Kowalczuk. Furthermore, the sources labeling her as a moderate conservative date back to 2017, and both the AfD as a whole and Weidel herself have undergone noticeable radicalization in recent years. –Tobias (talk) 17:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @FMSky, I'd appreciate it if you could redo your recent revert on my Alternative Mitte removal. Just because something is sourced in any way doesn’t automatically guarantee their reliability or recency. One of the sources is Welt, a tabloid newspaper owned by Axel Springer SE that also runs Bild, a deprecated source on WP. Welt also published articles influenced by climate change denial and right-wing bias in the past, making it unreliable. The other citation, taz, is also politically biased, albeit to a lesser extent.

Both sources are outdated by several years, and both Alice Weidel and the AfD as a whole have undergone significant radicalization since then, rendering them far from moderate—something the term Mitte implies (tagesschau, vox). Furthermore, the distinction between Flügel and Mitte is no longer relevant, as the Flügel was formally dissolved in 2020 and is no longer an official faction within the party. –Tobias (talk) 10:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Makes sense, i didnt know that faction doesnt exist anymore --FMSky (talk) 17:29, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Verifiable information on (international) career?

I cannot find any verifiable sources for the information regarding Weidel's time in China and Japan - the newspaper articles cited only reflect Weidel's own statements, as far as I can see. I also don't quite get how it is mathematically possible to complete a degree in 2004, work in Frankfurt in 2005-6, then spend (at least) 6 years abroad and work in Frankfurt again in March 2011? Even in various newspaper articles that (re)produce this information, no further sources are provided. It is of course possible that the dates for the stay abroad were rounded up generously, but even then it is puzzling that her (research?) stay in China would have lasted close to 5 years. Perhaps someone can shed some light on this. 2A00:A200:0:824:9D2F:EBFD:2080:211D (talk) 16:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2025

Under personal life. Her grandfather joined the nsdap in 1923 not 1932. As cited on his page. The source mentions 1923 as well. 2003:E4:9727:EE00:EB9E:DB4D:78C3:D772 (talk) 13:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Question: which source says that? Its name and (ideally) a quote from it would help. M.Bitton (talk) 14:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

IP is likely referring to this source. However, this source references this investigation by Welt am Sonntag (as does Politico here which is used a source in this article). The original investigation gives the year as 1932 and even states that the town in which Hans Weidel lived at the time, Leobschütz, didn't have a NSDAP chapter until earlier that year. Tages-Anzeiger seems to have made a typo when reporting on the investigation.

As such, I am going to deny the edit request and instead go over to the Hans Weidel article and fix the mistake there. Gremlin of the wiki (talk) 19:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: see my reply to @M.Bitton. Gremlin of the wiki (talk) 19:53, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Germany's Lady Macbeth

I have heard this nickname from my German friends 2A00:23EE:1400:4B2A:9E14:2E97:1EB:CFC0 (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

You should ask them for sources... Alexpl (talk) 19:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Far-right politician?

This label makes no sense. She's said in countless interviews and media that her positions are more that of a libertarian, she often criticizes EU interventions on citizens' lives, the deterioration of the free trade and over-regulation. When asked about the Third Reich she said that for her they were like communists, that they had a total control of the state and exercised total repression, so she said she has nothing to do with that. 12qwas (talk) 20:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion, but the sources we are using seem to think otherwise. Ymblanter (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Your sources regarding "far-right" in the first sentence of the introduction:

"guardian": heavily biased in favour of green and leftist parties

"euractiv": europhilistic, the AfD opposes more integration into the European Union

"france24": left-wing biased public broadcaster

Therefore your sources are not objective. 62.226.93.126 (talk) 22:06, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

We don't claim that sources are objective, nor is that required. 331dot (talk) 22:13, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

So if I go find biased sources that say a politician I don’t like is “far-left” I can assert that as fact? No, Wikipedia must maintain a NPOV. What I can do is state that named commentators/journalists have described the politician as “far-left”. But you’re not doing that here. You’re laundering opinion pieces and presenting them as objective truth, which is pure hackery. ~2026-68017-0 (talk) 04:00, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

yeah I know where your sources come from... ~2026-34518-76 (talk) 23:40, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

left-leaning wikipedia tries to smear conservative, patriotic to right-leaning political forces??? What a shocker... 62.226.93.126 (talk) 20:27, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

No one is smearing anyone. If the provided sources are not being accurately summarized, please detail those errors, or offer your own sources that describe this person differently.

What people describe themselves as is important, but not controlling.

Wikipedia is only as good as those who help us. If you want Wikipedia to have a right slant, you need to be here, participating, collaborating with people regardless of their views to best summarize what independent sources say about a topic. If your views prevent you from collaborating with others, we can't do much about your concerns.

Wikipedia does not claim to be without bias. Sources are presented to readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves when determining what they think about what they read. See WP:TRUTH. A reader can read an article and disagree with everything presented. Bias does not preclude the use of a source on Wikipedia, unless it is alleged that the source is so biased that they make things up out of whole cloth or lack basic standards of journalism. 331dot (talk) 22:11, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm in symphony with your statement however I would go as far to state conservative. ~2026-34518-76 (talk) 23:41, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Weirdly partisan take on Hitler controversy?

The subsection on Weidel's claims that Hitler was a communist are directly contradicted by the Wikipedia page for Hitler's views. There is no need to cite authors who claim Hitler was a socialist or had socialist elements when his anti-communism is clearly spelt out in the corresponding Wikipedia page 193.190.253.145 (talk) 11:30, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

From what I recall we did once have an editor on here trying to claim Hitler was a socialist as being true, so it helps to avoid that in future to directly dispel such falsehoods clearly and explicitly. Helper201 (talk) 19:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

I agree, and people STILL keep trying to edit it that he was a socialist, despite himself dispelling later on as he got power, as well as the corresponding Wikipedia page you mentioned, that is now linked in this article. Jag1762010 (talk) 21:23, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

bruh

it is not possible to be far right and lesbian. 47.28.76.207 (talk) 23:38, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

It is entirely possible for a lesbian to lead a party that opposes lesbian marriage and adoption by lesbian couples. It is possible for a politician to advocate against their own interests, for a politician against leopards eating people's faces to be the leader of the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party. Yue🌙 18:36, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Alice Weidel

Do Not Edit War on Alice Weidel Untamed1910 (talk) 19:31, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Hitler controvesy

Wouldn't it be better to delete the sources that seem to favor the idea that Hitler was truly a socialist? As someone said, this contradicts Wikipedia's classification of Hitler as an anti-communist 2804:14C:598D:4167:64F0:F194:4CDF:EFDD (talk) 21:45, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Agreed, especially since at least one of the sources (Henry Ashby Turner's book) doesn't contain a page cite, and my brief skim of the book did not seem to really support the idea that Hitler or the Nazis were socialist, rather that there were perceptions of them as being harmful to big business interests. Of course in the absence of a page cite, it is hard to specifically rebut his particular inclusion (never mind the fact that the section as a whole shouldn't be included since Hitler was clearly not a communist/socialist/leftist). ~2025-33173-45 (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Rainer Zitelmann clearly disagrees with your last sentence. Hitler was a socialist, its in the title Nationalsocialism. ~2026-30750-1 (talk) 02:15, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

being anti-communist doesn't necessarily make you not a socialist. hitler was an avid marxist hater, but marxism is just a branch. left wing groups of different denominations fight all the time. the fact that Makhno fought the soviet union, doesn't make him a rightist, just a left wing individual of different persuasions.

even if you don't agree with these takes, it is fair to point out that such ideas like hitler and nationali socialist ideology being socialist, aren't unheard of, and are even proposed by respectable scholars and academics. Jomini1291 (talk) 15:34, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

How exactly is that fair if himself denied being a socialist after he gained power, or that the first groups he attacked were left-wing ones? How is that fair if every source claiming that he was left-wing just "happen" to be libertarian and right-wing idealogues?

As already mentioned, There is no need to cite authors who claim Hitler was a socialist or had socialist elements when his anti-communism is clearly spelt out in the corresponding Wikipedia page Jag1762010 (talk) 21:27, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

when exactly did hitler deny being a socialist? also, again left-wing infighting is common. And to call Götz Aly, or Peter Temin libertarian is incorrect. Calling Mises and F.A. Hayek ideologues is disparaging and uninformed.

being anti-communist or anti-marxist doesn't bar someone from being a socialist. Jomini1291 (talk) 15:08, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

also I should point out that your own history seems to point at a fairly marxist bias. Jomini1291 (talk) 15:09, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

The sources attached to those statements show that he did not claim to be and actively opposed both socialism and communism. Here you point out you can be anti-communist and still be socialist, and then your edit claims that he actually was a communist. And then you assume my "history" has marxist bias without evidence. It is VERY clear that you just want to claim Hitler was a communist against a MASSIVE amount of the evidence to the contrary, simply because you oppose anything left-wing and want to associate Hitler with the left-wing that he actively opposed, to make the left look bad. Jag1762010 (talk) 22:14, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

{{Edit extended-protected}} Jag1762010 (talk) 22:16, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

the tagesschau claimed he delcared not being a socialist, meanwhile he in his own word in the same year clearly wrote he was a socialist. I don't think you can get more unbiased than his own words.

NONE of my edits make the claim that adolf hitler was a communist, I have never claimed this. I pointed how PREVIOUS edits claimed hitler was not a socialist which is contested.

you're being dishonest by making this strawman. communism =/= socialism =/= marxism. Jomini1291 (talk) 13:43, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

I would very much be curious if you pointed out which part of my edit claims hitler was a communist. As it is written the article is simply inaccurate and misleading. Jomini1291 (talk) 13:45, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Political Affiliation

unfortunately AfD especially Alice Weidel is not a far right organization and this is oppositional slander to purport the idea or tether the political party to the 1940s in the effect of psyops to encourage the firewall against AfD which I might add has progressed well from humble beginnings and is the number 2 largest in the bundestag. So... Correct it or don't but they aren't far right the are mostly conservative which is on the right as preferred to "Left Wing" and they are not extremists... She seems pretty progressive for a "Far Right" individual noting her long standing relationship. Sometimes I think only Hightops do these edits... ~2026-34518-76 (talk) 23:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)